Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.Login to AccountCreate an Account

Javascript Disabled Detected

You currently have javascript disabled. Several functions may not work. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality.

tomasz86

Posted 27 April 2012 - 01:25 AM

I wonder what caues such a poor performance of SSD on a PCI-E LSI Logic 3042E SAS controller:

1.Samsung 470 @ LSI Logic 3042E

Spoiler

2. Samsung 830 @ LSI Logic 3042E

Spoiler

On the other hand below you can see how the drive "should" work:

3. Samsung 470 @ AMD A55 SATA2 controller

Spoiler

And lastly, this is a RAID0 of 2x Fujitsu MAX3036RC (37GB 15000 rpm SAS drive) on the same LSI controller...

4. 2x Fujitsu MAX3036RC @ LSI Logic

Spoiler

I know that the controller can limit the sequentional transfer rates but has anyone got any idea why the 4K values are so bad? :/ I have also noticed that copying files and other operations are not smooth when the SSD is connected to the LSI Logic controller while there are no problems when connected to the AMD A55 one.

Of course everything happens on the same mainboard (ASRock A55 Pro3) and the LSI controller is connected to the second PCI-E (x4) slot.

allen2

Posted 06 May 2012 - 01:12 PM

allen2

Not really Newbie

Member

1,814 posts

Joined 13-January 06

Maybe you could tweak your lsi controller to get better performance but you won't get great speed with this very basic controller (even using a raid 0): You could try to enable or disable the disk read/write cache (some raid controller disable it and this one disable it usually), you could create a tweaked raid volume depending on the data stored (small files need usually a small strip size).

allen2

Posted 24 August 2012 - 11:53 PM

allen2

Not really Newbie

Member

1,814 posts

Joined 13-January 06

People think that SSD are faster than hard drive in every domain and it is wrong:
- Using incompressible data or not will give you completly different result. So depending on your usage, ssd might not be the right choice.
- Raid controller were optimized for hard drive not for ssd.
- Raid controller disable garbage collection (trim) so even if your OS support it, it won't happen unless the drive is able to do it by itself.
- You also took one the fastest enterprise hard drive and you're comparing it to a main stream ssd.

tomasz86

Posted 12 November 2012 - 04:32 PM

The controller recognises the SSD as an ATA133 disk and reduces its speed to ATA133. That's why its sequential read speed is always ~130 MB/s.

This isn't the newest controller and there are absolutely no options in its BIOS to manage the disks except for creating RAID0/1 arrays so probably nothing can be done in this particular situation. The controller itself is capable of higher speeds as can be seen in case of the Seagate Cheetah disk tested before.

Tripredacus

Posted 13 November 2012 - 09:59 AM

Well I looked at the specs of that card (on the website) and the latest OS it supports if Windows XP. Not even any Server 2003 support. It seems to me that the current firmware on that card probably doesn't know what an SSD is. Did you check to see if there was a firmware update is available for it?